nobspeople wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:35 am So, how can we trust the Bible if it’s not inerrant? Only by faith and want. No other way. There will always be an element of faith, but it doesn’t need to be blind faith. As for the “errors”, there are several possibilities to account for this. …
nobspeople wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 10:43 am If we accept the bible has errors, omissions, contradictions… how are we to determine which items are ‘correct’ and which are ‘in error’? Same as with any source of authority. There is no authority that is inerrant – government, teachers, professors, police, managers, doctors, politicians, preachers, or …
Difflugia wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:13 am I can’t, though, reconcile calling it the Word of God unless there is something qualitatively different about the Bible than any other human literature. If the Bible is presenting the fruits of human effort to understand God, how is that different than a devotional, even if it’s …
Read more “Bible is qualitatively different from any book in human history”
Mithrae wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:52 pm Once upon a time we had a Jewish member (cnorman perhaps) with a signature line saying something like “The Torah is the word of God… and some of it is even true!” In other words, it is errant but still the ‘word of God.’ Yes, my belief …
POI wrote: ↑Sun Oct 10, 2021 7:38 pm otseng wrote: ↑Sun Oct 10, 2021 3:30 pm POI wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 4:44 pm Paul asserts ALL Scripture. This means when Scripture speaks about Adam and Eve, a flood, the Exodus, slavery, women’s oppression, etc; it’s is all given by God. Which means it’s all …
As Diagoras has pointed out at length – and as Jeremiah, Paul, John and the author of Hebrews claimed – any God worthy of the name should be able to speak directly to dozens, hundreds, maybe even thousands of followers! Maybe that’s why Jesus said that only a few would be chosen, because God can’t …
Mithrae wrote: ↑Sat Oct 09, 2021 1:40 pm I mentioned some of these references in my earlier posts in the thread; it’s a surprisingly consistent theme among several authors. Strictly speaking Paul suggests that an authoritative written code will not just be no longer required but actively, fatally detrimental: “Not that we are competent of …
Mithrae wrote: ↑Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:12 pm But then in the case of direct communication from God the primary objection is, essentially, that it isn’t perfect and isn’t proof: It might be proof for the person who God spoke to, but certainly not proof for anyone else. We have these people all the time …
brunumb wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 11:56 pm It was written by people and there is nothing about it that necessitates the involvement of any deity. For purposes of this thread, can assume that. Definitely God is not the primary causation of the Bible. However, I do believe God can be involved through secondary causation. …
Diagoras wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:11 am A book is also a good method to reliably transmit information. Oral communication is prone to errors, esp. when it has to span a large space and time. I agree it’s a better method. But not inerrant. No method is inerrant, whether it would be oral or …